AOLers really lame
Pannache
Jeeze....talk about lamers....AOL...The other day I posted a message
about AOLers being on Westwood, and how I get tired of reading their stupid
posts in here, and now I would probably have hear stupid questions in
Westwood....Stupid me made the subject line like so : "Wchat on AOL?"
Quess what kinda response I get? Somebody from AOL sends me an Email
saying that "Yes!" AOL no does have Wchat, and this is where you can get
it.... Do they even read the Post? Somehow, I doubt it. It just goes to
show how bad AOLers really are.--
Pannache
Mark 'SpawN'
AOL is ONLY lame when you connect through AOL itself. But connecting through
TCP/IP is pretty good. Now don't go knocking me about this, but I've had AOL
a while back and didn't like it too much because I couldn't access stuff
like mIRC, Netscape, IE, and so on.. only within AOL. But now.. connecting
through TCP/IP makes AOL alot better. No offense.
CVincent19
In article <01bc436a$6f64c280$cb78bec7@jayborgm>, "Pannache"
<Pann...@digitalis.net> writes:
> Jeeze....talk about lamers....AOL...The other day I posted a message
>about AOLers being on Westwood, and how I get tired of reading their
stupid
>posts in here, and now I would probably have hear stupid questions in
>Westwood....Stupid me made the subject line like so : "Wchat on AOL?"
>Quess what kinda response I get? Somebody from AOL sends me an Email
>saying that "Yes!" AOL no does have Wchat, and this is where you can get
>it.... Do they even read the Post? Somehow, I doubt it. It just goes
to
>show how bad AOLers really are.--
For someone talking about how stupid people on AOL are, you certainly do
not know much about grammar or spelling. "Quess what kinda response I
get?" I know that this is not correct English. I think that this should
be "Guess what kind of response I got?" This would have been much
clearer. Try a little harder next time you think about flaming someone's
intelligence. Besides, WChat IS out for AOL. It just shows you that this
guy read the original post.
Da Knight
Siaw Woei Shyang
CVincent19 <cvinc...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970419012...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
Millennium
Apparently you didn't read the original or this one. The orginal was not
asking whether WChat was on AOL, it was flaming AOLers on WChat. And you
gave no functional response to this post. All you did was complain about
the grammar. What would your response have been if the spelling and grammar
were perfect? Hmm? What's that? Silence. AOL.
--
Millennium
---
STATS96
What the hell diff does it make who your ISP is? I use AOL plus 3
other ISP's and all have their good and bad qualities.
AOL has been very good for me for NG's and special interests, although
I do not use it for Web browsing.... anyway.........
People who slam AOLers are elitists who are most likely jealous that
Joe SixPack is now romping and stomping in their playground!
STATS
p.s. I used AOL to post this just to piss the snobs off!
Pannache
CVincent19 <cvinc...@aol.com> spewed forth in a retarded way out of his
chat pits in AOHell....
> For someone talking about how stupid people on AOL are, you certainly do
> not know much about grammar or spelling. "Quess what kinda response I
> get?" I know that this is not correct English. I think that this should
> be "Guess what kind of response I got?" This would have been much
> clearer. Try a little harder next time you think about flaming someone's
> intelligence. Besides, WChat IS out for AOL. It just shows you that
this
> guy read the original post.
>
> Da Knight
>
My grammar and spelling really have nothing to do with my
intelligence. Sometimes I type faster than I should. Oh well. I type in
my own unique way. I could give a damn about proper English, this isn't a
newsgroup full of English teachers. And again, you AOHell folks think I
give a DAMN about WChat being for AOL? I knew that the first time I posted
the original message, and you continue to inform me like I didn't know.
Cripes all mighty..... Stay off of WChat, and stay in you Chat Pits of
AOHell. It is bad enough you AOLamers clutter up the newsgroups with your
stupid questions, and your "Me Toos." But now they allow you on WChat.
And now the normal Internet users have to deal with the stupid questions,
and a lot of LOL's and ROFLMAO's....which are really annoying. And you
want to talk about spelling and grammar? Da Knight.... What is "Da" Da
Da Da.....ummmm..
Pannache
"I dreamed I met God. He sneezed, and I didn't know what to say to him."
ZTXjim
Cool, can I play too?
This is almost as amusing as all of those "Mike Shot His Wad At
CyberSex" spam floods. What's next? Oh, I know! "Why don't you
get a real ISP!"
The truth is, two thousand miles of phone line means that you
don't have to be polite any more. Doesn't it? Now you can treat
people just like you used to in grade school, before you had to
grow up.
Pretty cool eh? Right.
ZTXjim
Finally! The great "AOL vs ISP" debate. I love this stuff.
Let me see, if I add a couple of phone lines and pick up
the right softwarer, I can become a "real" ISP. Then I will
be better than AOL! Cool.
Don't think that that's how it works? Better do your
homework, cause of lot of the smaller shops are set up
just that way. Geez, there are high school kids doing
this stuff. What's so high and mighty about that?
If you have a problem with the truth then, well, you
have a problem. That's all.
Jim
SCM987
<< My grammar and spelling really have nothing to do with my
intelligence. Sometimes I type faster than I should. Oh well. I type in
my own unique way. I could give a damn about proper English, this isn't
a
newsgroup full of English teachers. And again, you AOHell folks think I
give a DAMN about WChat being for AOL? I knew that the first time I
posted
the original message, and you continue to inform me like I didn't know.
Cripes all mighty..... Stay off of WChat, and stay in you Chat Pits of
AOHell. It is bad enough you AOLamers clutter up the newsgroups with your
stupid questions, and your "Me Toos." But now they allow you on WChat.
And now the normal Internet users have to deal with the stupid questions,
and a lot of LOL's and ROFLMAO's....which are really annoying. And you
want to talk about spelling and grammar? Da Knight.... What is "Da" Da
Da Da.....ummmm..>>
I have AOL and an ISP and I will say that AOL sucks and so do the people
on it. The worst thing about AOLers is that they know nothing about
computers.
Nicktenor
1ST PSYCHIATRIST: Hmmm. Fascinating. So these people actually spend part
of their lives scorning and deriding
other people merely because they use AOL?
2ND PSYCHIRATRIST: Yes, but that's not all. They don't confine this
scorning and
deriding to a specialist newsgroup put
there for the sole
purpose of giving their meaningless
lives some purpose, oh no. They also
actually inflict their petty small-mindedness on
other newsgroups such as those devoted to the playing of
computer games - alt.games.redalert, for
instance.
1ST PSYCHIATRIST: Incredible. Do you think this is due to some hereditary
genealogical defect?
2ND PSYCHIATRIST: Nahh, they're just a bunch of sad assholes.
....mors stupebit et natura, cum resurgit creatura...
ZTXjim
Oh, I'm cut to the bone! Did it make your pecker stiff when you
typed that? Make you feel like a real cyber-stud to so easily
conquer your foe with a few quick keystrokes? Do you only
feel like a "real" man while sitting in front of your monitor?
If so, then you have a lot more problems than I want to know
about. Not only do you hide behind a glass screen, but you
use a "fake" name. My suggestion remains, get out and meet
the real world. You might just be surprised.
It's been my observation that guys who bluster on about how
much better their "fill_in_the_blank" is are really hiding
something else. Either that or they are playing some kids
game while they pretend to be an adult.
Jim
Millennium
ZTXjim <ztx...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970425133...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> Oh, I'm cut to the bone! Did it make your pecker stiff when you
> typed that? Make you feel like a real cyber-stud to so easily
> conquer your foe with a few quick keystrokes? Do you only
> feel like a "real" man while sitting in front of your monitor?
>
Didn't really expect to conquer anybody. Just felt like saying it. It's
very difficult to change people's minds on the Internet. And it only makes
it worse when examples like you come along.
Flames don't bug me. I get a kick out of them.
And better to feel like a real man in front of a computer than while
sleeping with some cheap hooker with VD.
> If so, then you have a lot more problems than I want to know
You've no idea how much I would like to tell you about them.
> about. Not only do you hide behind a glass screen, but you
> use a "fake" name. My suggestion remains, get out and meet
Fake name like most people on the Internet, EXCEPT AOLers. Why give out my
real name?
> the real world. You might just be surprised.
>
The real world pretty much sucks, in case you hadn't noticed.
> It's been my observation that guys who bluster on about how
> much better their "fill_in_the_blank" is are really hiding
Who's blustering? I just feel a hot wind.
I got plenty to hide, but nothing to make me talk about my
'fill_in_the_blank' [which would be what? That makes no sense]
> something else. Either that or they are playing some kids
> game while they pretend to be an adult.
>
> Jim
>
I don't see your last name anywhere, either.
--
Millennium
---
Mike Loughlin
In article <19970425133...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, ztx...@aol.com
says...
>
>Oh, I'm cut to the bone! Did it make your pecker stiff when you
>typed that? Make you feel like a real cyber-stud to so easily
>conquer your foe with a few quick keystrokes? Do you only
>feel like a "real" man while sitting in front of your monitor?
>
>use a "fake" name. My suggestion remains, get out and meet
>
>much better their "fill_in_the_blank" is are really hiding
>game while they pretend to be an adult.
>
>Jim
Is it just me or does old Jim 'ere have a really big stick up his ass?
First, this is way off topic for this group. Quit being a hipocrit. You
sit there are piss off at me 'cause I am posting off topic and then you sit
there and continue a really boring, off topic thread. Just go get Agent and
ignore all messages from people who don't use AOL, looser.
--
/-------------------------------------------------\
| /| | Mike Loughlin |
| \/ / | Founding member of |
| / /\ | The Association of "Hey! All AOL |
|/_/\_\ | Members are DumbAsses, And We |
| / \ | Are Witnesses!" |
\___|^^|___|______________________________________/
SILAOL: Search for Intelligent Life on AOL
STATS96
Amen, brudder!
Doc Shadow
nick...@aol.com (Nicktenor) chirped:
>1ST PSYCHIATRIST: Hmmm. Fascinating. So these people actually spend part
>of their lives scorning and deriding
>other people merely because they use AOL?
What's with the stupid spacing in the message, AOLamer? Oh, I forgot,
AOLamers only get to use one kind of newsreader, and it SUCKS.
AOLamers have no right to flame (if that's what you call that) so go
back to your censored service and crawl back under your rock.
Nicktenor
In response to my posting, the extravagantly-named "Doc Shadow" wrote:
>What's with the stupid spacing in the message, AOLamer? Oh, I forgot,
>AOLamers only get to use one kind of newsreader, and it SUCKS.
If by your high standards it [quote] sucks, whatever shall I do? It works
fine for me; if you've got a problem, go bleat to your administrator, or
more likely your mom.
>AOLamers have no right to flame (if that's what you call that) so go
>back to your censored service and crawl back under your rock.
How can I [quote] go back to AOL when I'm there already (i.e. now, reading
alt.games.redalert)?
As for it being censored, I certainly haven't noticed. Maybe it is in your
country
(?USA), but speaking personally, I can access all I want to. I can use IE
or NN to browse if needs be, I can access all the newsgroups I want to
(certainly all the alt* and rec* hierachy). It's clearly too highly
censored for your tastes, but then you don't tell us your tastes, or why
AOL's [quote] censorship galls you so. Maybe it doesn't cater for the
depraved tastes of some (e.g. paedophilia); I couldn't say. I've never
tried it.
Your move, Doc
Nick
....benedictus qui venit in nomini Domine....
Mvetsch
>about AOLers being on Westwood, and how I get tired of reading their stupid
>posts in here, and now I would probably have hear stupid questions in
>Westwood....Stupid me made the subject line like so : "Wchat on AOL?"
>Quess what kinda response I get? Somebody from AOL sends me an Email
>saying that "Yes!" AOL no does have Wchat, and this is where you can get
>it.... Do they even read the Post? Somehow, I doubt it. It just goes to
>show how bad AOLers really are.--
>
>
>Pann...@digitalis.net
What a punk, just because a few people from AOL posted some silly
things does not mean AOL'ers in general suck. I have my own ISP,
however my wife preferes AOL and uses it daily. She is a College
graduate with a degree and works for the Orange County Department of
Education, belive me she is not stupid, or lame. It's dim-witted
no-brainers like you who are the real lamers, you give all computer
users a bad name when generalize a group of people based on the
actions of a few. Why don't you go to a baseball game or something,
you need a break from your computer dude..............
Non AOL user, but married to one
Nicktenor
In admonishing the naughty yet entertaining Mike Loughlin, Crmall writes:
>
>You are a child. Which makes me wonder how you ever got into
>the University of Texas in the first place. After all, it wasn't due to
>intelligence or your charming personality.
>
......which of course is a nice observation, as we would expect from
Crmall.
However, have you considered that you don't actually have to *attend*
these places to get a *.edu e-mail address?
If that is true in ML's case, then maybe there's hope for The University
Of Texas after all.
One further thought - he could (after all) be at the U of T - perhaps
employed cleaning out the toilets. That would appear to be nice and
suitable for him.
Mike - please keep it up. The grown-ups really enjoy your pre-school
grammar, spelling and innate sense of comedy.
Nick
....mors stupebit et natura cum resurget creatura....
ZTXjim
Hmmm, looks like we caught a couple of "let's troll
for flamer" types. Look guys (both Mike & Mill) I
really don't care what you do in your spare time.
Old Mill's Usenet profile shows exactly what he
meant about having problems, but that's none of
business.
Mill, what exactly am I an example of anyway?
Perhaps you're pissed because I'm not falling for
the same old boring act that you pull all of the
time. Trust me, net-bigots get old real fast.
Mike, please go to the book store and get a book
with more words, ok? You are living proof that some
people just aren't ready to go to college. I think your
main problem is too many people see you as the
small-minded punk that you are.
To both of you, grow up! Neither of you is immortal,
this is real life, not some game. Don't either of you
"get it"? You know, in another time and place I
could see both of you wearing white hoods. It's all
about attitude, gentilemen, and both of your's stink.
Who died and made you both "gods of the internet"?
Both of you come across as self-appointed protectors
of cyberspace, fighting the evil forces of the great
devil "AOL". Can't wait for the action figures! Do you
guys have fan clubs too?
But really, do you ever read what you write? Do you
know how stupid you guys sound sometimes? At
least Mill comes across as someone who does a
little research on the subjects he talks about. Mike
sometimes forgets what he's written just a few days
ago.
And yeah Mike, I finally saw where you stood up
for me, as out of character as that might be. So
let me thank you, and suggest that there may be
hope after all. Just stay away from the "dark side"
and you'll do all right.
Now we can continue this rather meaningless
exchange, or we could move on. I for one would
like to continue putting pressure on WestWood
to unlock more of Red Alert. I'm sure by now
both of you are aware that inside of the stock
version of Red Alert are tons of graphics from
C&C. Right?
Right now, the Chem-Warrior, Flame Tank, MLRS
Rocket Launcher, SSM Launcher and a couple of
other goodies are just waiting to be put in use. I
think just about the only unit I'd really want to add
beyound these would be the A-10.
Wouldn't you rather be talking about that kind of
stuff? Or perhaps Red Alert really isn't the game
you want to play.
Jim "My Real Name" Morley
NudirNahay
In article <5jrit8$h22$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>,
nospam...@mail.utexas.edu (Mike Loughlin) writes:
>Is it just me or does old Jim 'ere have a really big stick up his ass?
>First, this is way off topic for this group. Quit being a hipocrit. You
>sit there are piss off at me 'cause I am posting off topic and then you
sit
>there and continue a really boring, off topic thread.
Talk about hypocrites man! Don't your read what you fucking
write? You just gave Jim shit for being off topic an dthen admit
you were. What the fuck is up with that,anyways? And what the
hell does "..you sit there are piss off at me..." mean anyways?
Don't they teach grammer inthat fucking college of yours?
NudirNahay
In article <19970429105...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, crm...@aol.com
(Crmall) writes:
>You are quite right. Using the Mike loughlin's critically
>acclaimed "Netgod's Dictionary" that would be the correct
>spelling.
Perhaps that should be the "NetGod's Dictionary For
The Illiterate Flamer".
NudirNahay
In article <19970421192...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
sta...@aol.com (STATS96) writes:
Nicely said. But, I prefer 12 packs. The price is better.
See, conservative shopping tips from an AOLer.
NudirNahay
In article <01bc4ea1$c98b9300$cc78bec7@jayborgm>, "Pannache"
<Pann...@digitalis.net> writes:
> Elitist. Hardly..... Hahaha....I used to be on AOHell....used to
>get the busy signals, and the awesome 2400baud hook-up times. Yeah, I
>sure am jealous that Joe sixpack is in my playground. I just hope he
takes
>a virus back with him back to the ChatPits. Oh, by the way. I
>cross-posted your message into the alt.aol.sucks Newsgroup. I am sure
they
>would have something nice to say to you about your great message.
>--
>Pannache
>
>
Hey, Pinnochio your post "is off topic". And why is that one of you
fruitcakes spouts off about AOL you complain about chat pits. Is
this further proof that you guys have no life? You only used AOl to check
out chat pits? What's a matter there Pokie, di they kick you out of the
room?
NudirNahay
In article <33637aa6...@client.ne.news.psi.net>, D...@shadow.com (Doc
Shadow) writes:
>What's with the stupid spacing in the message, AOLamer? Oh, I forgot,
>AOLamers only get to use one kind of newsreader, and it SUCKS.
>AOLamers have no right to flame (if that's what you call that) so go
>back to your censored service and crawl back under your rock.
>
>
I'm sorry, I disagree. this newsreader doesn't suck. Afterall, your
BS came through loud and clear. I don't call it flamming either. I call it
criticizing. Where I come from flamer is slang for fag. If you want to be
a elitist flamer ( and no one lse can be because you say so), please
by all means.
be my guest!
Crmall
In article <19970429055...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
nick...@aol.com (Nicktenor) writes:
You are quite right for pointing out this possibility. And I thank you
for that. I like your janitor theory, however, Mike publicly claimed here
in the ng several months back that he was a student there.
I also posted a message here a few months ago, pointing out the
flaws in Mike's so called logic. He cliams all people on AOL are
lamers (Perhaps he never heard of a thesaurus), due to the posts
made by a few individuals who happen to use AOL. So, I said,
using his logic, that would mean that all utexas users
are illiterate like Mike.
But, this of course was sarcasm to point out the flaws in
his logic. For I would not stoop to his level and actually berate
all the utexas users because of something Mike Loughlin said.
That would only make me as petty as he. And a hypocrite as well.
And as I pointed out many times here in the NG, as for stupid
postings and questios, they come from a wide variety of ISPs, and
again they are not a reflection on any particular ISP. Only the individual
responsible for such postings is responsible.
How long would it be before Mike's transgressions move onto
racism? Would he start calling all Italians lamers if one italian posted
a stupid question here? (My apologies to the Italians, I only use this
as an example).
Wars have been started over such things. Thank god Mike is
not a political science major.
Nicktenor
In article <19970429093...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, crm...@aol.com
(Crmall) writes:
>stoop to his level and actually berate
>all the utexas users because of something Mike Loughlin said.
>That would only make me as petty as he. And a hypocrite as well.
>
>
Shouldn't that be "hipocrit"? <g>
Millennium
This is the second time I had to type this. The first one got lost due to
operator error. Software 'feature' actually. So I've been able to review
things; therefore, this isn't exactly what I was going to say. And it's
shorter.
ZTXjim <ztx...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970429032...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> Hmmm, looks like we caught a couple of "let's troll
> for flamer" types. Look guys (both Mike & Mill) I
> really don't care what you do in your spare time.
> Old Mill's Usenet profile shows exactly what he
> meant about having problems, but that's none of
> business.
>
> Mill, what exactly am I an example of anyway?
> Perhaps you're pissed because I'm not falling for
> the same old boring act that you pull all of the
> time. Trust me, net-bigots get old real fast.
>
An example of the AOLer who thinks everbody else should do things AOL's
way, instead of AOL getting with the program.
And I wasn't aware I was acting. And certainly not for very long.
I have decided that you seem at least of slightly above average
intelligence. So I no longer consider you an enemy.
> Mike, please go to the book store and get a book
> with more words, ok? You are living proof that some
> people just aren't ready to go to college. I think your
> main problem is too many people see you as the
> small-minded punk that you are.
>
> To both of you, grow up! Neither of you is immortal,
I personally plan to live forever, in some form or another. Hopefully one
that can see through clothes and walls.
> this is real life, not some game. Don't either of you
> "get it"? You know, in another time and place I
> could see both of you wearing white hoods. It's all
> about attitude, gentilemen, and both of your's stink.
>
You assume I'm white? (I am) Or did you mean 'time, place, and
circumtances'? Besides, I look horrid in white. And thanks. I've been
working on my attitude since, oh, about 7th grade, when I realized life is
over-rated, and people aren't worth the dirt we're made of.
> Who died and made you both "gods of the internet"?
The last one. DUHH.
> Both of you come across as self-appointed protectors
> of cyberspace, fighting the evil forces of the great
> devil "AOL". Can't wait for the action figures! Do you
> guys have fan clubs too?
>
No action figs. Couldn't find a way to print "HELP" or "ME TOO" on such
tiny heads. Hehe.
> But really, do you ever read what you write? Do you
> know how stupid you guys sound sometimes? At
> least Mill comes across as someone who does a
> little research on the subjects he talks about. Mike
Nah. Just psychic.
> sometimes forgets what he's written just a few days
> ago.
>
I had to look back at my last one before typing this. Please quote passages
you refer to, either like this, or before your words.
> And yeah Mike, I finally saw where you stood up
> for me, as out of character as that might be. So
> let me thank you, and suggest that there may be
> hope after all. Just stay away from the "dark side"
> and you'll do all right.
>
Ick. If you go to the light side, you'll be able to see all the disgusting
stuff. At least in the dark you can pretend it doesn't exist.
> Now we can continue this rather meaningless
> exchange, or we could move on. I for one would
Good. Typing tires me. I'll stop if you will. But don't consider this
giving in. With the proper spark, the flames could reignite. See the end of
this for my views on AOL.
> like to continue putting pressure on WestWood
> to unlock more of Red Alert. I'm sure by now
> both of you are aware that inside of the stock
> version of Red Alert are tons of graphics from
> C&C. Right?
>
So?
Actually I quit playing RA. Got dull, especially after my brother beat both
sides. I work from 7-5:30, so I had little time for it. I never finished RA
or C&C.
> Right now, the Chem-Warrior, Flame Tank, MLRS
> Rocket Launcher, SSM Launcher and a couple of
> other goodies are just waiting to be put in use. I
> think just about the only unit I'd really want to add
> beyound these would be the A-10.
>
> Wouldn't you rather be talking about that kind of
> stuff? Or perhaps Red Alert really isn't the game
> you want to play.
>
> Jim "My Real Name" Morley
>
I have more fun flaming than staying on topic. But without a topic, no
flames can start.
Now, My Views on AOL.
The idea of AOL isn't bad. They have their own network, so things should be
better than general Net traffic, but it isn't up to the demand users put on
it. And all their proprietary content is useful to the right type of
person. Most AOL haters aren't the CHAT type, or the 'hurry-up-and-wait'
type for that matter. AOL's problems have seriously lowered its value even
for those who like it.
The main problem is that AOL dumbs it down, so even dummies can use the
Net. Theirs' are the posts we flame. The intelligent AOL'ers don't need to
post asking for help, so they don't get flamed.
I personally don't flame people who seem to have an actual desire to learn.
The AOL in the headers just sets off a warning light to watch for idiocy.
If AOL would update their software to standards, and provide consistent
quality service, everybody would be happy.
I use MSN and a local ISP. Yeah, yeah. MSN ain't the greatest either. I
only use it for access to proprietary stuff, like the Star Trek (SURPRISE!)
site, and e-mail that I can't get mailing lists to switch to my new one.
MSN suffers from too much hope for users' bandwidth. AOL hopes users will
be to busy trying to connect to call and complain.
--
Current favorite band:
HANSON!!
Millennium
---
Craig Fletcher
AOL is not a great platform for RA or other 3rd party games. Not yet
at least. AOL has too many problems. The game integrated into
AOL are OK but then who wants to play them.
> What a punk, just because a few people from AOL posted some silly
> things does not mean AOL'ers in general suck.
You are right to a point not all AOLers suck. But, when you see someone
driving a Yugo down the street I bet you laugh and call them a loser. This
is not because you know the person but because you know they are driving
trash.
The problem is that AOL screwed up the internet very bad when first getting
online. Also, until recently AOLers were mostly newbies who didnt know
that with a little less user freindly software they could get on the net at
an
isp that gives better internet connectivity. At this point AOLamers got on
the net with a lot of ALL CAPS messages and the me too responses
to a 50 page long usenet message. Perhaps AOL needs to give it users
a drivers exam before throwing them onto the information superhighway
driving a Yugo with no idea how to operate it.
As for your wife she may be well educated but that means nothing on
the net. You can be well educated and not have a clue about the net.
It seems strange your wife doesnt use your isp.
ZTXjim
First, since it is so easy to re-read earlier posts I
find it a waste of time to reprint a ton of text just to
say "me too". Usenet rules broke down several
years ago, which is sad. I understand that even
pure porno groups and getting killed by spam.
Since my use of computers predates Usenet, ISPs
and AOL, mu views will not match yours. Tough.
Over the last thirty years I've watched my home
town go from a nice looking city to a crappy looking
near-ghetto. So you can say that I've been forced
to live with my own "invasion".
Right now you've got several million people hooked
up and posting who have never heard of Usenet and
couldn't care less that there used to be rules. You
can see this stuff coming from everywhere, not just
from AOL, and not just from the United States. So,
what are you going to do about it?
I guess you can troll newsgroups looking for really
carppy posts and then send another crappy post
all your own. Great, now we've got two crappy posts
floating around where there used to be just one. That
really helps, doesn't it?
On the other hand, perhaps this kind of thing is
done just to stroke you own underdeveloped ego. My
guess that this is the true agenda of most of these
guys I see. Most people I know who really care gave
up on public networks and rate them down there with
CB radio.
Since I make a good living cleaning up after "experts",
I have a really dim view of "self-appointed" ones. In my
life I've only met one or two people who really could
be called expert. Yeah, maybe I have a little higher
standard of who is an "expert" or a "hero". Trust me,
I'm neither.
Why do I like hacking Red Alert? It's fun, ok? I've been
messing with games since Wolf3D, finding hidden stuff
and messing around. Ever seen the version of Wolf with
the six-foot nuns with guns? I did that. But I'm not the
only guy out there, look at all the people having fun with
Quake. Everybody has fun with different stuff, ok?
My only real question is, if somebody doesn't play Red
Alert anymore, then why are they flaming people in a
Red Alert newsgroup? Oh, and to the guy who emailed
me the VERY funny letter, who cares if I was a AOL-
beta tester years ago, what does that have to do with
anything?
Jim
Mvetsch
O
>
>As for your wife she may be well educated but that means nothing on
>the net. You can be well educated and not have a clue about the net.
>
She does use my ISP, she uses it to sign on to AOL, she uses a TCP\IP
connection to avoid busy signals and give her a faster connection. We
have both been using AOL and the internet for many years, she just
likes the chat rooms on AOL, I've tried to get her into IRC's but she
likes the IM's and all the other crap, oh well, I'll bet that guy
driving his Yugo really loves it too. When you think about it, since
she uses my ISP to sign on to AOL then I guess you could say AOL is
NOT her ISP, just the software she uses to browse. That would by
default, not make her an AOL'er . It would be the same as one guy who
used Netscape and another who used IE, or one who uses AGENT and one
who uses WINVN. Oh well, mute point, but AOL doesn't suck, it's just
not the same as what you or the next guy might have. In fact, I have
a hang over today and I'm not in a good move so just to prove that AOL
isn't the only ISP that has sucky users, THIS FUCKING SHIT IS STARTING
TO PISS ME OFF, I'M GONNA GO FUCKING POSTAL SOON, THE NEXT TIME SOME
FUCK FROM AOL SAYS SOMETHING STUPID PLEASE FUCKING FLAME THE PERSON
NOT HIS PROVIDER, IT HAS NOTHING TO FUCKING DO WITH HIS PROVIDER.
EVERY TIME SOME DICKWEED FROM EARTHLINK POST'S SOMETHING STUPID YOU
DON'E SAY "FUCKING EARTHLINKLAMERS" SO GET A FUCKING LIFE!!!!
Brian Hinman
AOL SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!
NudirNahay <nudir...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970429114...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
Millennium
Was that a reply to my last one? This thing has split into so many threads
in my newsreader, I can't tell. Whether or not, I agree with just about
everything you said.
Crmall
In article <336d72c4....@news.hiwaay.net>, jo...@pball.com (John
Hamilton) writes:
>Now, I wrote "almost universal" because not all <alias>@aol.com posts
>come from people suffering from stupidity. Just MOST of them. Hence,
>we simply expect posts from <alias>@aol.com people to be stupid because
>statistically they are 9 out of 10 times.
>
>
Oh, how marvelous! The guilt by association argument. I had thought
better of you. I was gravely mistaken and am appalled.
Let's see, there are presently millions of people on AOl now ( anyone
have actual numbers? ) And I am to be associated with them all.
I'm sorry I don't know all these people. Not even a small fraction. Do
you know everyone who uses @pball.com? Would you like to be accused
of something because of something that one of the said or
did.
Out of all those millions on AOL, I am sure that most could really give
a shit about Red Alert or Westwood, or even to bother to read newsgroups
at all. So how many are we left with now?
I think most intelligent people understand my point by now. It is merely a
matter of statistics and bigotry.
Crmall
In article <01bc5512$67d4c1a0$5a18...@jlsjkw.flinet.com>, "Millennium"
<unrev...@for.now> writes:
>The main problem is that AOL dumbs it down, so even dummies can use the
>Net. Theirs' are the posts we flame. The intelligent AOL'ers don't need
to
>post asking for help, so they don't get flamed.
>
>I personally don't flame people who seem to have an actual desire to
learn.
>The AOL in the headers just sets off a warning light to watch for idiocy.
>
>
So, you admit the newsgroup is for helping each other, but you won't
help certain people based on the ISP they use. Bigot. Hypocrite.
Crmall
>This is the second time I had to type this. The first one got lost due to
>operator error. Software 'feature' actually. So I've been able to review
>things; therefore, this isn't exactly what I was going to say. And it's
>shorter.
If a person on AOL said this you guys would be all
over him right now, calling him stupid, etc.
Later in this same post you bunch all AOL people together
and say they are all stupid except the ones you do not
hear from. Is that kind of like saying that you don't believe
in things you don't see?
Yoav Zingher
In article <19970429032...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, ZTXjim
<ztx...@aol.com> writes
>Right now, the Chem-Warrior, Flame Tank, MLRS
>Rocket Launcher, SSM Launcher and a couple of
>other goodies are just waiting to be put in use. I
>think just about the only unit I'd really want to add
>beyound these would be the A-10.
I've been thinking about this. I don't promote piracy in any way at all,
and think that software companies should be supported for their hard
work. That said, however...
Westwood have been annoying recently. They've released a buggy and
seemingly incomplete game, then a so called expansion set which is
little more than a map pack. They also re-released an old game and
charged a normal retail price for it without an upgrade option for those
of us who bought it a year or two ago.
Then graphics are in there. Couldn't someone (I'd volounteer if I knew
how) create a patch and render C&C gold useless? Just stick in the
original units, and there you go. Plus it would also include waypoints
and the E function which I don't think C&C gold has.
Just a though.
--
Yoav Zingher Yo...@yoav.demon.co.uk
...
"Traders, trouble-makers and ambassador | The only reason some people
all tucked snugly in their little beds... | get lost in thought is because
I love this time of night." | it's unfamiliar territory.
-- Cmdr. Susan Ivanova, GROPOS; Babylon 5 |
Millennium
Crmall <crm...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970502100...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>
> If a person on AOL said this you guys would be all
> over him right now, calling him stupid, etc.
>
Yeah. So? I didn't start this thread. Just keeping it up. The reason I see
nothing wrong with this is that I didn't come on asking why the stupid
program froze. I just dealt with it and moved on. The only reason I wrote
that was to explain that it wasn't what I originally was going to say.
And I don't believe in things I can't see. I have no proof that you are
anything more than a figment of my imagination. It's still fun to play,
though.
> Later in this same post you bunch all AOL people together
> and say they are all stupid except the ones you do not
> hear from. Is that kind of like saying that you don't believe
> in things you don't see?
>
I just noticed something. It took you two posts to respond to my one.
Crmall
In article <01bc5511$0985cd20$992aa497@quakeman>, "Craig Fletcher"
<cfle...@swbell.net> writes:
>You are right to a point not all AOLers suck. But, when you see someone
>driving a Yugo down the street I bet you laugh and call them a loser.
This
>
>is not because you know the person but because you know they are driving
>trash.
>
>
Hey, what do you got against Yugos anyways?
NudirNahay
In article <19970503172...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, crm...@aol.com
(Crmall) writes:
They make good paper weights or planters.
NudirNahay
In article <01bc55b2$c32edfe0$68cfb5cf@jojo-upyours>, "Brian Hinman"
<rhi...@flash.net> writes:
>AOL SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!
Incredible! Unbelievable! How original. How long did it take you
to think that one up? An hour? Two?
NudirNahay
In article <19970502100...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, crm...@aol.com
(Crmall) writes:
>In article <01bc5512$67d4c1a0$5a18...@jlsjkw.flinet.com>, "Millennium"
><unrev...@for.now> writes:
>
>>This is the second time I had to type this. The first one got lost due
to
>>operator error. Software 'feature' actually. So I've been able to review
>>things; therefore, this isn't exactly what I was going to say. And it's
>>shorter.
>
>If a person on AOL said this you guys would be all
>over him right now, calling him stupid, etc.
>
>Later in this same post you bunch all AOL people together
> and say they are all stupid except the ones you do not
>hear from. Is that kind of like saying that you don't believe
>in things you don't see?
Oh, god, not the fairies again!
Crmall
In article <01bc5765$d7426f60$5d18...@jlsjkw.flinet.com>, "Millennium"
<unrev...@for.now> writes:
>When I said intelligent AOL'ers don't need to post for help, I meant the
>type of post that just asks a question that's already been answered. Not
>the ones that actually seem to have tried to solve it, explain what they
>tried, etc.
But, would you not acknowledge the fact that this is a common
problem that is not exclusive to AOL ?
Crmall
In article <19970506152...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, ztx...@aol.com
(ZTXjim) writes:
>This has nothing to do with what you guys are talking
>about, I it somehow fits in. The other day I was in my
>fav tech bookstore when I spotted a cool book titled:
>
>"America Offline"
>
>Instead of being a collection of AOL bashings, this
>was a very funny "translation" of net-speak into real
>world terms. For example, browsing was something
>you did in a store, that kind of thing.
>
>Trust me, I can't capture the humor here, but it was
>great. It's well worth the hunt, if only for a cool
>gift idea. Just wanted to pass that on.
Although I can't remember the article or address, etc., I
have seen and heard about a site that is a parody of AOL,
right down to the graphical interface. I believe it was
called America Offline as well.
Does anyone else know the url for this?
Seth Bowden
>Although I can't remember the article or address, etc., I
>have seen and heard about a site that is a parody of AOL,
>right down to the graphical interface. I believe it was
>called America Offline as well.
Check out http://www.kelani.com/aol/
Have fun!
--Seth Bowden
bs...@cornell.edu
The News Reader
NudirNahay <nudir...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970504103...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
...
WOW!
AOLamers are smart...
they can turn on their PC, type, and EVEN connect to the internet!
their IQ is prob. >200!
blinking...@gmail.com
AOLamers only get to use one kind of newsreader, and it SUCKS.
AOLamers have no right to flame (if that's what you call that) so go
back to your censored service and crawl back under your rock."
I know you do!
My little retarded wooozle-woo!